| name | outcome-update |
| version | 0.3.0 |
| description | Improve an existing outcome loop playbook from prior runs and Superdense reward evidence. Use when the user wants observer-mode analysis, macro workflow improvements, run.md updates, lever-map refinement, diagnostics improvements, or efficiency fixes for future outcome runs. |
Outcome Update
Update only the reusable playbook and completion gate for an outcome loop. This is observer mode: inspect prior runs and Superdense reward evidence, then improve run.md and, when repeated misses show a reusable completion gap, gate.md for future runs.
Read references/outcome-loop.md before editing.
Workflow
- Locate the outcome folder and read
goal.md, run.md, gate.md, and runs/.
- Identify runs since
## Update Marker in run.md. If no marker exists, review all completed run folders and add ## Update Marker after updating.
- Inspect Superdense evidence related to those runs:
- session IDs listed in
work.md,
- artifact IDs,
- externalization target IDs,
- relevant cohorts or version chains,
- reward snapshots already stored in Superdense.
- hypotheses and experiments referenced in
work.md,
- open/refuted/supported hypotheses from
superdense hypothesis list --project <project-id>,
- open or due experiments from
superdense experiment list --project <project-id>.
- Look for macro improvements:
- levers that seem weak, strong, or under-instrumented,
- lever statuses to promote, exhaust, retire, or keep because they are Pareto-best on a non-headline reward dimension or guardrail,
- realized explore/exploit mix versus the target ratio,
- hypotheses that should be pruned from future selection because they were refuted,
- experiments that need more reps, are due for verdict, or are inconclusive because instrumentation is missing,
- novelty gaps in untested lever regions,
- actions that repeatedly create friction,
- missing preflight checks,
- repeated required-gate failures or warning misses,
- diagnostic measurements that explain the north star poorly,
- target repo/account workflow gaps,
- Superdense reward-layer bottlenecks.
- Render due verdicts with
superdense experiment verdict <id> when an experiment has enough reps and a mature reward window. Use verdicts to update lever status and the Selection Policy, but do not duplicate reward snapshots into markdown.
- Retune the target explore ratio in
run.md as evidence accumulates: higher when uncertainty and novelty gaps dominate, lower when a proven lever has headroom and supported hypotheses.
- Edit
run.md for playbook improvements and gate.md for reusable completion checks or failure-policy refinements. Do not edit goal.md, old run folders, or target repos. Do not create a new run.
- Keep
goal.md protected. If evidence suggests the north star or guardrails are wrong, add a clearly marked "Recommended goal review" section to run.md instead of changing goal.md.
- Preserve useful existing playbook content. Make focused improvements that the next
outcome-run can execute without guessing.
- Update
## Update Marker in run.md to the latest reviewed run id or timestamp.
- Commit the playbook and gate changes, for example
git add run.md gate.md && git commit -m "outcome: update playbook (runs through <marker>)". If any reviewed runs/<run-id>/ files are still uncommitted, include them in the same commit.
Rules
- Do not create
metrics.md.
- Do not create
hypotheses.md or experiments.md; use Superdense commands for durable prediction and verdict state.
- Do not duplicate Superdense reward snapshots into markdown.
- Do not run a new action.
- Do not perform external publishing or irreversible external actions.
- Do not treat
gate.md as a per-run checklist; update it only when future runs need a better reusable completion contract.
- Prefer Superdense metadata and compactors before raw session logs.
- Do not amend or rewrite prior commits. Each update is an append-only commit, matching the append-only lineage principle.
Completion
Report what changed in run.md and gate.md, which runs and Superdense evidence informed the update, any verdicts rendered, lever promotions/retirements, explore-ratio changes, the new update marker, and any recommended human review of goal.md.